6. In all cases of dismissal for want of jurisdiction, the fees for the copy shall be taxed against the party bringing the cause into court, unless the court shall otherwise direct.

Attachment for Costs.

7. Upon the clerk of this court producing satisfactory evidence, by affidavit or the acknowledgment of the parties or their sureties, of having served a copy of the bill of fees due by them, respectively, in this court, on such parties or their sureties, an attachment shall issue against such parties or sureties, respectively, to compel payment of the said fees.

RULE 10. SECURITY FOR COSTS.

DECISIONS 1-5.

1. (Feb., 1812.) Each party is liable to the clerk of this court for the fees due to him from each party respectively. Caldwell v. Jackson, 7 Cranch, 276.

2. (Jan., 1836.) The transcript of the record had been lodged by the plaintiffs in error with the clerk of the court on the 24th of October, 1835, who refused to file it or docket the cause until the plaintiffs had given the fee-bond in pursuance of the thirty-seventh rule of the court. The counsel for the plaintiffs in error moved to have the transcript filed and docketed, alleging they had done all the law required to be done in order to bring the case before this court. On the part of the defendant in error, his counsel filed and read in open court certified copies of the writ of error, citation, and appeal-bond, and of the judgment of the Circuit Court; and having stated that the plaintiffs in error had failed to have the case docketed according to the thirtieth rule of the court, they moved to have the case docketed and dismissed. The court overruled the motion to docket and dismiss the cause, and also the motion to have the transcript filed and the cause docketed without the fee-bond being first given. These motions were overruled on the 18th of January, 1836; and the court allowed the plaintiffs in error until the first day of March following to give to the clerk the fee-bond; on the

failure so to give the same, the writ of error to be dismissed. Owings v. Tiernan, 10 Pet. 447.

3. (Jan., 1849.) Under the thirty-seventh rule of this court, the clerk is not bound to docket a case until the bond for costs is given. Van Rensselaer v. Watts, 7 How. 784, 911.

4. (Oct., 1876.) Where, by reason of the failure of the appellant to enter into an undertaking to the clerk for the payment of his fees, or otherwise satisfying him in that behalf, the appeal has, upon motion of the appellee, been docketed and dismissed, the court will not, on motion of the appellant at a subsequent term, set aside the order of dismissal, and grant leave to file the record and docket the cause. S. & M. Railroad Co. v. L. N. Bank, 4 Otto, 253.

5. (Oct., 1880.) A. sued out a writ of error returnable to the October term, 1877. The return was duly made, the transcript of the record lodged in the clerk's office in September of that year, and a citation issued and served in time; but by an oversight of A.'s counsel no fee-bond was given. The cause was not docketed. In September, 1878, the bond was filed and the cause then docketed, no motion to docket and dismiss having in the mean time been made. Held, that a motion made at the present term to dismiss the writ must be denied. Edwards v. United States, 12 Otto, 575.

Whenever any record transmitted to this court upon a writ of error or appeal shall contain any document, paper, testimony, or other proceeding in a foreign language, and the record does not also contain a translation of such document, paper, testimony, or other proceeding, made under the authority of the inferior court, or admitted to be correct, the record shall not be printed; but the case shall be reported to this court by the clerk, and the court will thereupon remand it to the inferior court, in order that a translation may be there supplied and inserted in the record.

1 Now the tenth rule.

1. In all cases where further proof is ordered by the court, the depositions which shall be taken shall be by a commission, to be issued from this court, or from any Circuit Court of the United States.

2. In all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, where new evidence shall be admissible in this court, the evidence by testimony of witnesses shall be taken under a commission to be issued from this court, or from any Circuit Court of the United States, under the direction of any judge thereof; and no such commission shall issue but upon interrogatories, to be filed by the party applying for the commission, and notice to the opposite party or his agent or attorney, accompanied with a copy of the interrogatories so filed, to file crossinterrogatories within twenty days from the service of such notice: Provided, however, That nothing in this rule shall prevent any party from giving oral testimony in open court in cases where, by law, it is admissible.

RULE 12. EVIDENCE. DECISIONS 1-32.

1. (Feb., 1808.)

-

After deciding the question of value upon the weight of the evidence, the court will not continue the cause for the party to produce further evidence as to the value. United States v. Brig Union, 4 Cranch, 215.

2. (Feb., 1812.) In cases of admiralty jurisdiction, new evidence will be admitted in this court; and for that purpose a commission may issue. Brig Wells v. United States, 7 Cranch, 22.

3. (Feb., 1812.) This court will grant a commission to take new evidence, to be used here, in a case of admiralty jurisdiction. United States v. Goodwin, 7 Cranch, 107.

4. (Feb., 1814.) Where the affidavits produced on the order for further proof are positive, but their credibility impaired by the non-production of letters mentioned in the affidavits, a second order for further proof will be allowed in the Appellate Court. The Frances, 8 Cranch, 348.

5. (Feb., 1814.) Further proof, inconsistent with that already in the case, refused on the part of the claimant. The Euphrates, 8 Cranch, 385.

6. (Feb., 1814.) Suppression of papers, where it appears to have been intentional and fraudulent, and attended with other suspicious circumstances, is good cause for refusing further proof.

But where the suppression appears to be owing to accident or mistake, and no other suspicious circumstances appear in the case, further proof may be allowed. The St. Lawrence,

8 Cranch, 434.

7. (Feb., 1814.) Questions as to the validity of capture; one man only having been put on board; the ship's papers and the navigation of the vessel being left to the master; further proof ordered. The Grotius, 8 Cranch, 456.

8. (Feb., 1815.) Neutral cover of British property. Time for further proof refused. Cargo of Hazard v. Campbell, 9 Cranch, 205.

9. (Feb., 1815.) Further proof will be allowed by this court, where the national character and proprietary interest of goods re-captured do not distinctly appear. Schooner Adeline, 9 Cranch, 246.

10. (Feb., 1816.) Where the evidence is so contradictory and ambiguous as to render a decision difficult, the court will order further proof in a revenue or instance cause. The Samuel, 1 Wheat. 9.

11. (Feb., 1816.) If, upon the opening, it appears to be a case for further proof, then it may be admitted instanter, unless, indeed, the court should be of the opinion that the captors ought to be allowed to produce further proof also. The Venus, 1 Wheat. 113.

12. (Feb., 1816.) In cases of joint or collusive capture, the usual simplicity of the prize proceedings is necessarily departed from; and where, in these cases, there is the least doubt, other evidence than that arising from the captured

vessel or invoked from other prize causes may be resorted to. The George et al., 1 Wheat. 408.

13. (Feb., 1816.)

cause, this court will

Where an inspection and comparison

of original documents is material to the decision of a prize order the original papers to be sent up

from the court below.

14. (Feb., 1817.)

The Elsineur, 1 Wheat. 439.

The provision in the Judiciary Act of 1789, ch. 20, sec. 30, as to taking depositions de bene esse, does not apply to cases pending in this court, but only to cases in the District and Circuit Courts. Testimony by depositions can be regularly taken for this court, only under a commission issuing according to its rules. The Argo, 2

Wheat. 287.

15. See the rule at the present term as to the mode of taking depositions by commission out of this court, or the Circuit Courts, in causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. This rule applies both to prize and instance causes. Further proof is admissible in the latter as well as the former. Ib., 289, note a.

16. (Feb., 1818.) A bill of lading, consigning the goods. to a neutral, but unaccompanied by an invoice or letter of advice, is sufficient evidence to lay a foundation for the introduction of further proof. The Friendschaft, 3 Wheat. 48.

17. (Feb., 1818.) A witness offered to be examined virá voce, in open court, in an instance cause, ordered to be examined out of court. The Samuel, 3 Wheat. 77.

18. (Feb., 1818.) Decree of restitution affirmed, with a certificate of probable cause, in an instance cause, on further proof. The San Pedro, 3 Wheat. 78.

19. (Feb., 1818.) It is a relaxation of the rules of the prize court, to allow time for further proof, in a case where there has been concealment of material papers. The Fortuna,

3 Wheat. 237.

20. (Feb., 1818.) The captors are competent witnesses upon an order for further proof, where the benefit of it is extended to both parties. The Anne, 3 Wheat. 435.