Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

149 U. S. 285; Soule 1". U. S., (1879) 100 U. S. 11; Smith v. U. S., (1831) 5 Pet. (U. S.) 292; U. S. v. Smith, (1888) 35 Fed. Rep. 490].

Where the account of a revenue officer, or other person who was intrusted with the custody of public money and who was an alleged delinquent in regard thereto, had been finally adjusted by the proper officers, it was held that such account is not admissible under this section, unless it is certified by the proper officer and authenticated under a department seal to be “a transcript from the books and proceedings of the treasury department; and where the certificate states that the “ transcript” is a true copy of the original on file, it is not a sufficient certificate, this being the certificate an officer would make in reference to mere copies of bonds, contracts, or other papers relating to or connected with the final adjustment of the account. U. S. v. Pinson, (1880) 102 U. S. 548.

Where there was an action on a bond given by the defendant to secure the faithful performance by a party of his duties as special Indian agent, and there was a treasury transcript certified by the register and secretary of the treasury containing a statement on the debit side of the charge “for government property received at the Western Shoshone Agency, and not properly accounted for,” the transcript, however, not showing of what the property consisted nor the manner in which the value of the same was ascertained, it was held, notwithstanding the fact that there was attached to the transcript another paper professing to describe the property item by item and stating the value of the various articles, but not showing in what way such values were ascertained and not professing to be a transcript from any book kept or a copy of any document on file in the treasury department, but probably being compiled from original returns made by the Indian agent of public property in his possession now on file in the department and professing to show what portion of such property had not been accounted for by proper vouchers, that such treasury transcript was not admissible under

this section. U. S. v. Smith, (1888) 35 Fed. Rep. 490.

Ex parte statements of post-office officials. - In an action by the United States against a party on his bond as a postmaster, to recover an alleged deficit in his accounts, it was held that ex parte statements of account niade by post-oslice officials were not admissible as competent evidence to support a judgment, it not being “ the intention of the law that executive officers should be clothed with the power thus to usurp the province of court and jury, and decide, finally and irrevocably, questions of fact upon er parte and hearsay statements.” U. S. 1. Case, (1892) 49 Fed. Rep. 270 [citing C. S. v. Jones, (1834) 8 Pet. (U. S.) 375; U. S. v. Forsythe, (1855) 6 McLean (U. S.) 584; U. S. 1. Buford, (1830) 3 Pet. (U. S.) 12; Hoyt v. U. S., (1850) 10 How. (U. S.) 109; U. S. 4. Smith, (1888) 35 Fed. Rep. 490; Cox 1. U. S., (1832) 6 Pet. (U. S.) 202; Smith v. U. S., (1831) 5 Pet. (U. S.) 292; U. S. v. Edwards, (1839) 1 McLean (U. S.) 467; U. S. v. Patterson, (1829) Gilp. (U. S.) 47; U. S. v. Beattie, (1829) Gilp. (U. S.) 97; Bruce 4. U. S., (1854) 17 How. (U. S.) 440; U. S. 1. Irving, (1843) 1 How. (U. S.) 250).

Where departmental treasury regulations are printed, and a duplicate copy of such regulations was found in a book kept by the collector, such book containing a large number of treasury circulars from the commissioners, it was held that such regulations in the form of a circular might be admitted as evidence in a suit against the collector. Chadwick v. U. S., (1880) 3 Fed. Rep. 750.

Restatement of accounts. - Under this section, a disbursing officer's accounts may, under some circumstances, and with reference to certain matters, be restated by the treasury, and, when so restated, they may be used to make a prima facie case against him. U. S. v. Butler, (1902) 114 Fed. Rep. 582 [citing Soule v. U. S., (1879) 100 U. S. 11; Moses v. U. S., (1897) 166 U. S. 571].

See also, on this section, U. S. v. Vanzandt, (1822) 2 Cranch (C. C.) 338; U. S. v. Martin, (1832) 2 Paine (U. S.) 68; U. S. v. Humason, (1881) 8 Fed. Rep. 71 (under section 882, supra).

Sec. 887. [Transcripts from books of the Treasury in indictments for embezzlement of public moneys.] Upon the trial of any indictment against any person for embezzling public moneys, it shall be sufficient evidence, for the purpose of showing a balance against such person, to produce a transcript from the books and proceedings of the Treasury Department, as provided by the preceding section. [R. S.]

Act of Aug. 6, 1846, ch. 90, 9 Stat. L. 63; to the United States conditioned for the faithAct of March 2, 1797, ch. 20, 1 Stat. L. 512. ful performance of his duties as such attor

Against whom evidence can be used. — The ney, and filing the same in the interior evidence mentioned in the section can only department, also empowered as à special be used against persons who are previously agent of that department, without compensadeclared to be guilty of embezzlement." tion (except such fees as were then or might (1855) 7 Op. Atty.-Gen. 82.

thereafter be authorized by said department), Not subject to prosecution. — W. having to collect and pay over to the said Indians been constituted an attorney by certain In their claims. The appointment as such dians to collect from the government claims special agent was not made in pursuance of for back pay and bounty due them for mili any law of Congress. It was held that W. tary services, he was, upon executing a bond did not become, by virtue of that appoint

ment, or by the execution of the bond, an damages, if any, the government has thereby othcer of the United States within the mean sustained. Wright's Case, (1871) 13 Op. ing of this section and subject to prosecution Atty.-Gen. 588. thereunder; but it was advised that the secre Garbled and mutilated statements. See, tary of the interior may proceed by civil ac under section 886, U. S. v. Gaussen, (1873) tion on the bond for any breach of its con 19 Wall. (U. S.) 198, and other cases cited ditions, and seek the recovery of whatever as to garbled and mutilated statements.

Sec. 888. [Copies of returns in returns-office.] A copy of any return of a contract returned and filed in the returns-office of the Department of the Interior, as provided by law, when certified by the clerk of the said office to be full and complete, and when authenticated by the seal of the Department, shall be evidence in any prosecution against any officer for falsely and corruptly swearing to the affidavit required by law to be made by such officer in making his return of any contract, as required by law, tc said returns-office. [R. S.]

Act of June 2, 1862, ch. 93, 12 Stat. L. 412..

Sec. 889. [Copies of Post-Office records and of Auditor's statement of accounts.] Copies of the quarterly returns of postmasters and of any papers pertaining to the accounts in the office of the Sixth Auditor, and transcripts from the money-order account-books of the Post-Office Department, when certified by the Sixth Auditor under the seal of his office, shall be admitted as evidence in the courts of the United States, in civil suits and criminal prosecutions; and in any civil suít, in case of delinquency of any postmaster or contractor, à statement of the account, certified as aforesaid, shall be admitted in evidence, and the court shall be authorized thereupon to give judgment and award execution, subject to the provisions of law as to proceedings in such civil suits. [R. S.]

Act of March 3, 1825, ch. 64, 4 Stat. L. dicted for embezzling government money. 113; Act of July 2, 1836, ch. 270, 5 Stat. L. Quarterly reports were sent in to the govern82; Act of May 17, 1864, ch. 87, 13 Stat. ment signed by the postmaster, but made out L. 18: Act of July 27, 1868, ch. 246, 15 Stat. in the handwriting of the accused. These reL. 197.

ports, duly certified as required by this sceTranscript prima facie evidence. A suit tion,

held to have been properly tras instituted by the government to recover admitted as evidence. McBride 1. U. S., (C. on a postmaster's bond, and a duly certified C. A. 1900) 101 Fed. Rep. 821. transcript of the books of the United States The transcript of the quarterly report detreasury department showing the post-office séribed in the indictment, duly certified by aécounts between the government and the the sixth auditor of the treasury for the postpostmaster was offered as evidence. The office department, was held to have been competency of this evidence was sustained, properly admitted in evidence. U. S. v. but the court held that it was only prima Snyder, (1882) 14 Fed. Rep. 554. facie evidence, subject to be met by other Transcript giving acknowledged balance. competent proof. U. S. v. Carlovitz, (C. C. Where a transcript from the post-office deA. 1897) 80 Fed. Rep. 852; U. S. v. Dumas, partment set out the balance due by the post(1893) 149 U. S. 278 [citing U. S. v. Irving, master, without giving full items, such (1843) 1 How. (U. S.) 250; U. S. v. Hodge, balance having been struck by the postmaster (1851) 13 How. (U. S.) 478; Watkins v. U. himself, and acknowledged by him, the tranS. (1869) 9 Wall. (U. S.) 759; Soule r. U.S., script was held admissible. Lawrence v. U. (1879) 100 U. S. 8]; U. S. v. Marks, (Ariz. S., (1811) 2 McLean (U. S.) 581. 1898) 52 Pac. Rep. 773.

Balances of quarterly returns audited and Postmaster-general's order. — In an aetion

adjusted by government officers. - Where brought by the United States to recover from

transcripts of accounts are offered in evidence a postmaster and his sureties money alleged in an action to recover upon a postmaster's to have been illegally retained by him while bond, the fact that the items charged in such such postmaster, an order was issued hy the accounts, ás balances of quarterly returns, do postmaster-general, alleging that false busi

not purport on the face of such accounts to ness returns had been made by the postmas be balances acknowledged by him, and that ter, and that, by reason thereof, a definite they are not supported by proper vouchers, compensation would be allowed him, in place but merely purport to be the balances of said of commissions as heretofore. Such order was

quarterly returns as audited and adjusted by held admissible as evidence. U. S. v. Marks, the officers of the government, does not de(Ariz. 1898) 52 Pac. Rep. 773.

stroy the competency of the transcripts. U. Quarterly reports signed by postmaster, but S. ». Ilodera(1851) 13 Tlow. (U. S.J 478. made out in handwriting of the accused as

Transcripts not containing statement of sistant. – An assistant postmaster was in credits claimed, but disallowed. - Where, in

31

Volume III,

were

an action to recover upon a postmaster's bond, certified transcripts of accounts are offered in evidence, the fact that they do not purport to contain the statement of credits claimed by the postmaster and disallowed by the government does not invalidate the transcripts. U. S. 1. Hodge, (1851) 13 How. (U. S.) 478.

Where a transcript of the account in a suit

brought upon a postmaster's bond omitted allowed credits, it was held that such omission did not destroy the sufficiency of the transcript. U. S. i. Harrill, (1857) McAll. (U. S.) 243, 26 Fed. Cas. No. 15,310, citing U. S. v. Hodge, (1851) 13 How. (U. S.) 478.

See under section 886, U. S. v. Case, (1892) 49 Fed. Rep. 270.

Sec. 890. [Copies of statements of demands by Post-Office Department.] In all suits for the recovery of balances due from postmasters, a copy, duly certified under the seal of the Sixth Auditor, of the statement of any postmaster, special agent, or other person, employed by the Postmaster-General or the Auditor for that purpose, that he has mailed a letter to such delinquent postmaster at the post-office where the indebtedness accrued, or at his last usual place of abode; that a sufficient time has elapsed for said letter to have reached its destination in the ordinary course of the mail; and that payment of such balance has not been received, within the time designated in his instructions, shall be received as sufficient evidence in the courts of the United States, or other courts, that a demand has been made upon the delinquent postmaster; but when the account of a late postmaster has been once adjusted and settled, and a demand has been made for the balance appearing to be due, and afterward allowances are made or credits entered, it shall not be necessary to make a further demand for the new balance found to be die. [R. S.]

Act of July 27, 1868, ch. 246, 15 Stat. L. 197.

Sec. 891. [Copies of records, etc., of General Land-Office.] Copies of any records, books, or papers in the General Land-Office, authenticated by the seal and certified by the Commissioner thereof, or, when his office is vacant, by the principal clerk, shall be evidence equally with the originals thereof. And literal exemplifications of any such records shall be held, when so introduced in evidence, to be of the same validity as if the names of the officers signing and countersigning the same had been fully inserted in such record. [R. S.]

Act of April 25, 1812, ch. 68, 2 Stat. L. sioner of the General Land Office to be a cor717; Act of July 4, 1836, ch. 352, 5 Stat. rect copy of any record or paper on file in L. 109, 111; Act of March 3, 1843, 'ch. 95, 5 his office, yet it might be received in evidence Stat. L. 627, 628.

under this section as an official book. Jesse See title PUBLIC LANDS in this work, and D. Carr Land, etc., Co. 1. U. S., (C. C. A. see R. S. secs. 2469 and 2470, infra, relative 1902) 118 Fed. Rep. 821, citing Belk v. to commissioner of the General Land Office Meagher, (1881) 104 U. S. 279. preparing and certifying copies of records, Land warrants. - This section is authority books, and papers for use as evidence in for the introduction in evidence of the trancourts of justice.

script of the General Land Office in a question The records of the land office being of great as to the location of land warrants. Culver importance to the country and kept under the v. Uthe, (1890) 133 U. S. 655. official sanction of the government,

Where a certificate of a copy was signed by contents must always be considered, and they a person as acting commissioner of the are always received in courts of justice as General Land Office," with the seal of the evidence of the facts stated.” Galty v. Gall. General Land Office attached, the certified way, (1830) 4 Pet. (U. S.) 331.

copy was admitted under the section, such Book prepared as substitute for the original signature not showing a vacancy in the office tract book. The records of a local land office of the commissioner. Murray v. Polglase, having been burned, a book was subsequently (1896) 17 Mont. 455. prepared under the direction of the commis “ The words 'evidence equally, as used in sioner of the General Land Office as a substi the Act of Congress, were not intended to tute for the original tract book thus de mean that in all cases the copy should have stroyed, and was transmitted by him in the the same probative force as the original inregular course of his official duty to the strument, but that it should be regarded as register and receiver of the local land office of the same class, in the grades of evidence, for use in disposing of the public lands in as to written and parol, and primary and that district. It was held that, although secondary." Campbell 1. Laclede Gas Co., this book was not certified by the commis (1886) 119 U.S. 445.

their

Sec. 892. [Copies of records, etc., of Patent-Office.] Written or printed copies of any records, books, papers, or drawings belonging to the Patent Office, and of letters-patent authenticated by the seal and certified by the Commissioner or Acting Commissioner thereof, shall be evidence in all cases wherein the originals could be evidence; and any person making application therefor, and paying the fee required by law, shall have certified copies thereof. [P. S.]

Act of July 8, 1870, ch. 230, 16 Stat. L. Standard Elevator Co. v. Crane Elevator Co., 207.

(C. C. A. 1896) 76 Fed. Rep. 767 [citing This section relates only to records, books, Brooks 1. Jenkins, (1844) 3 McLean (U. S.) papers, or drawings “belonging to” the 432; Parker 1. Haworth, (1848) 4 McLean Patent Office, and letters-patent. Paine v. (U. S.) 370; Lee 1". Blandy, (1860) 1 Bond Trask, (C. C. A. 1893) 56 Fed. Rep. 233. (U. S.) 361; Dederick v. Whitman Agricul

Affidavit of vendor of patent right. - A tural Co., (1886) 26 Fed. Rep. 763; National copy of letters-patent is duly authenticated Folding Box, etc., Co. 1. American Paper only when it bears such official attestation as Pail, etc., Co., (1893) 55 Fed. Rep. 488]. will render it legal and admissible in evi. But contra, A certified copy of a patentdence; and therefore it was held that the office record of an assignment of a patent is affidavit of the vendor of the patent right, not prima facie evidence of the genuineness that his letters-patent are genuine, that they of the instrument. New York v. American have not been revoked or annulled, and that Cable Co., (C. C. A. 1894) 60 Fed. Rep. 1016 he has full authority to sell or barter the [citing with approval Paine v. Trask, (C. C. right, is not sufficient attestation. Mayfield A. 1803) 56 Fed. Rep. 233, and disapproving r. Sears, (1892) 133 Ind. 86.

of Brooks v. Jenkins, (1844) 3 McLean (U. Second transcript. - Where a transcript S.) 432; Parker v. Haworth, (1848) 4 Mcfrom the Patent Office is defective, another Lean (U. S.) 370; Lee r. Blandy, (1860) 1 transcript may be certified which may correct Bond (U. S.) 361; Dederick v. Whitman the errors in the first. Brooks 1:. Jenkins, Agricultural Co., (1886) 26 Fed. Rep. 763; (1844) 3 McLean (U. S.) 432.

National Folding Box, etc., Co. v. American Assignments of patent rights. — “The Paper Pail, etc., Co., (1893) 55 Fed. Rep. sense – the essential significance and intent 488]. - of this section is that the record or official Certificate by "acting commissioner.” copy of any assignment shall give to any Where there was a contest between the patperson interested the prima facie assurance entee and third persons, and the copies were that an original assignment was made in certified to by a person signing himself as terms as shown in the record, that such in “acting commissioner," it was held that this strument was subscribed as shown, that it might, on the face of it, be sufficient, there was delivered, that the signature thereto is being å presumption of the legality of the the genuine signature of the assignor, and appointment. Woodworth v. Hall, (1846) 1 that such assignor had an assignable interest Woodb. & M. (U. S.) 248. according to the purport of the instrument.”

Sec. 893. [Copies of foreign letters-patent.] Copies of the specifications and drawings of foreign letters-patent, certified as provided in the preceding section, shall be prima-facie evidence of the fact of the granting of such letterspatent, and of the date and contents thereof. [R. S.]

Act of July 8, 1870, ch. 230, 16 Stat. L. of the copy produced. Schoerken v. Swift, 207.

etc., Co., (1881) 7 Fed. Rep. 469. There being nothing to show whether the Authentication of French patent. - A copy foreign patent was an open or secret one, of a French patent certified by the director except what could be gathered from the copy of the Conservatoire National des Arts et itself and the fact of its production, it was Métiers of France, under the seal of that held that, only public records being provable department, and verified by the minister of by copies certified merely, and it being taken agriculture and commerce and the minister for granted that the departments of a for of foreign affairs, under their seals, but not eign government dealing with patents would hy the great seal of France, was held to be not have the patent in a condition to certify authenticated in the proper manner and adby copy if it was secret, and not public, the missible in evidence under the section. fact of such certification showed it to be Schoerken 1. Swift, etc., Co., (1881) 7 Fed. what could be certified, and that the inven Rep. 469, citing De Florez r. Raynolds, (1880) tion described by it was, in the sense of the 17 Blatchf. (U. S.) 436. patent law, patented by the original patent

Sec. 894. [Printed copies of specifications and drawings of patents.] The printed copies of specifications and drawings of patents, which the Commissioner of Patents is authorized to print for gratuitous distribution, and to deposit in the capitols of the States and Territories, and in the clerk's offices of

the district courts, shall, when certified by him and authenticated by the seal of his office, be received in all courts as evidence of all matters therein contained. [R. S.]

Resolution No. 5 of Jan. 11, 1871, 16 Stat. L. 590.

Sec. 895. [Extracts from the Journals of Congress.] Extracts from the Journals of the Senate, or of the House of Representatives, and of the Executive Journal of the Senate when the injunction of secrecy is removed, certified by the Secretary of the Senate or by the Clerk of the House of Representatives, shall be adnitted as evidence in the courts of the United States, and shall have the same force and effect as the originals would have if produced and authenticated in curt. [R. S.]

Act of Aug. 8, 1846, ch. 107, 9 Stat. L. 80. the two houses and of the President, as an

This section“ is not a statutory declaration act which has passed Congress, and been apthat the journals are the highest evidence of proved by the President, may be overcome by the facts stated in them, or complete evidence what the journal of either house shows or of all that occurs in the progress of business fails to show." Field v. Clark, (1892) 143 in the respective houses; much less that the U. S. 649. See also U. S. v. Burr, (1895) authentication of an enrolled bill, by the 159 U. S. 85. oflicial signatures of the presiding officers of

Sec. 896. [Copies of records, ete., in offices of United States consuls, etc.] Copies of all official documents and papers in the office of any consul, viceconsul, or commercial agent of the United States, and of all official entries in the books or records of any such office, certified unler the hand and seal of such cilicer, shall be admitted in evidence in the courts of the United States. [R. S.)

Act of Jan. 8, 1869, ch. 7, 15 Stat. L. 266.

Sec. 897. (Certain books and papers in offices of district and circuit courts in Teras, Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Kansas.] The transcripts into new books, made by the clerks of the district courts in the several districts of Texas, Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Kansas, in pursuance of the act of June twenty-seven, eighteen hundred and sixty-four, chapter one hundred and sixty-five, from the records and journals transferred by them respectively, under the said act, to the clerks of the circuit courts in said disiricts, when certified by the clerks respectively making the same to be full and true copies from the original books, shall have the same force and effect as records as the originals. And the certificates of the clerks of said circuit courts, respectively, of transcripts of any of the books or papers so transferred to them, shall be received in evidence with the like effect as if made by the clerk of the court in which the proceedings were had. [R. S.]

Act of June 27, 1864, ch. 165, 13 Stat. L. 199.

Sec. 898. [Transcribed records in the clerks' offices of western district of North Carolina.] The transcripts into new books made by the clerks of the circuit and district courts for the western district of North Carolina, in pursuance of the act of June four, eighteen hundred and seventy-two, chapter two hundred and eighty-two, when certified by the clerks respectively making the same to be full and true copies from the original books, shall have the same force and effect as records as the originals. And the certificates of the clerks of said circuit and district courts respectively, of transcripts of any of the said transcribed records, shall also be received in evidence with the like effect as if made by the proper clerk from the originals from which such records were transcribed. [R. S.] Act of June 4, 1872, ch. 282, 17 Stat. L. 217.

« PreviousContinue »