¶1It is objected, that the court erred in referring the cause to a commissioner, instead of taking the testimony in open court;, but I cannot perceive any foundation for this objection. The court had ascertained, from the hearing before it, that the main questions in controversy were in respect to the accounts between the parties, as master and owner of the vessel, and very proper, therefore, to be referred to and heard by a commissioner. The rights of the respondent were not prejudiced, as the whole case could afterwards be presented to the court upon the proofs, and exceptions to the commissioner’s report; and much of the valuable time of the court was saved by the reference. Decree affirmed.
21 F. Cas. 1190
Shaw v. Collyer
U.S. District Court
Decided October 1, 1859
U.S. District Court · decided 1859-10-01
<p>Case No. 12,718.</p> <p>Trial— Admiralty — Reference to Commissioner.</p> <p>On the hearing, on a libel in personam, the district court heard sufficient evidence to show that the principal question was as to the amount due by the respondent, as owner of a vessel, to the libellant, as its master, for wages, and then, instead of faking further testimony in open court, referred it to a commissioner to take proofs as to the nature, extent and value of the service, and as to credits for payments: Held, ■ that the practice was proper, as not prejudicing the rights of the respondent and saving the time ■of Hie court ••</p>
Decided 1859-10-01