Remington & Perkins v. Peckham
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Petition for a writ of mandamus. The petition prayed that a writ of mandamus might be issued to Samuel W. Peckham, Esq., one of the standing masters in chancery of this court, commanding him to issue writs of attachment against certain witnesses, namely, James O. Swan and William S. Briggs, to compel their attendance before him, the said master, for the purpose of giving testimony in perpetual memory, to be used as evidence in any court in this state, in any civil suit or…
Read the full summary
Petition for a writ of mandamus. The petition prayed that a writ of mandamus might be issued to Samuel W. Peckham, Esq., one of the standing masters in chancery of this court, commanding him to issue writs of attachment against certain witnesses, namely, James O. Swan and William S. Briggs, to compel their attendance before him, the said master, for the purpose of giving testimony in perpetual memory, to be used as evidence in any court in this state, in any civil suit or action wherein the petitioners, or either of them, were or might be interested, on the one part; and George H. Slade and…
1Opinion of the CourtDtjkfee, J.
We do not think the power is expressly given to a. justice of the Supreme Court or to a master in chancery, who is engaged in taking depositions in perpetual memory, to compel witnesses to appear and testify by process of contempt. The provision of the statute which is referred to as expressly conferring the power is Gen. Stat. ch. 203, § 30. That section declares that “ the same formalities shall be observed in the taking of depositions in perpetual memory as in the taking of other depositions ; ” and, inasmuch as there is express provision in regard to the taking of other depositions, to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Carpenter v. DameIndiana Supreme Court · 1858
- In re FarnhamMichigan Supreme Court · 1860
- Ex parte BarnesDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1846