Pennsylvania State Reports Volume 77 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1876 edition. Excerpt: ... three of the men who sat on the inquest. The court below, without delivering an opinion, reversed the judgment of the aldermen. The complainant removed the record to the Supreme Court, where they assigned for error, 1. The reversal of the aldermen s judgment. 2. Making the order for taking depositions. 3. In returning with the writ of error the deposition of Stout as part of the record and proceedings below. A. M. Burton, for plaintiff in error.--The record of the proceedings before the aldermen was strictly correct and is conclu sive. Parol evidence cannot be heard to contradict it: Mentz v. Hamman, 5 Whart. 150. A sheriff s return is of such high authority that it cannot be contradicted: Rice v. Groff, 8 P. F. son on Sheriffs 72; Diller v. Roberts, 13 S. & R. 60. Nothing is before the court but the regularity of the proceeding: before the justices as it appears upon the record: Pennsylvania ailroad Co. v. Lutheran Congregation, 3 P. F. Smith 445; McMillan v. Graham, 4 Barr 140; Buchanan v. Baxter, 17 P. F. Smith 348; Railroad Company v. Keenan, 6 Id. 198; Union Canal Company v. Keiser, 7 Harris 134. L. Stover, for defendants in error.--The depositions do not seek to contradict the alleged record, but show that however perfect in form, it is no record at all, because the men who made it had no authority to sit in judgment on the case. Depositions from the earliest period have been used in such cases: Vansciver v. Bol ton, 2 Dall. 114; Bcrginhofen v. Martin, 3 Yeates 479; Buckmyer v. Dubs, 5 Binn. 29; Dumber v. Jones, 1 Ash. 215; Ayres v. Novinger, 8 Barr 412; Railroad Co. v. Heister, Id. 444; 1 Tr. & H. Practice 715. The court below may receive evidence or not, and it is not a subject of a writ of error: ...