Q.B.D

CIS), or because he has a lien upon it.” Steph. Dig. Ev. art. 11S. This is stated as the English rule, but in this country it is said that the weight of authority confines the excuse for not producing the document to the exposure to penalty or forfeiture or criminal prosecution; Bull v. Loveland, 10 Pick. (Mass.) 9. A custodian of public documents will not be required to bring them into court under a subpoena duces tecum where official copies can be had; Delaney v. Philadelphia, 1 Yeates (Pa.) 403; or where their production would result in injury to the public; Gray v. Pentland, 2 S. & R. (Pa.) 23; 7 Dowl. 093. Papers which are confidential communications are protected as oral statements of the same character would be, as, for example, papers of a client in the hands of his attorney; Durkee v. Leland, 4 Vt. G12; 9 M. & W. G09. “Although a paper should be in the legal custody of one man, yet if a subpoena duces tecum is served on another who has the means to produce it, he is bound to do so;” 1 Oampb. 17. Telegrams are not privileged, and the officers of a telegraph company must produce them under a subpoena duces tecum without respect to rules of the company to the contrary; U. S. v. Babcock, 3 Dill. 5GG, Fed. Cas. No. 14,484; U. S. v. Hunter, 15 Fed. 712; Ex parte Brown, 72 Mo. 83, 37 Am. Rep. 426; notwithstanding statutes forbidding the disclosure of such messages; Ex parte Brown, 72 Mo. 83. Corporations generally may be required to produce their books and papers which are essential to the rights of litigants; L. R. 9 C. P. 27; Wertheim v. Trust Co., 15 Fed. 718. See id., 15 Fed. 718. A subpoena is ordinarily granted as of course; the applicant drafts his own form and he purchases it at his peril. The court may refuse to allow an excessive number of witnesses to be summoned; Butler v. State, 97 Ind. 378. A witness who denies its regularity should move before the return day; but where it was not served in time, he may appear then and move to set it aside. A second subpoena cannot issue after the first has been served and while it remains unreturned. The writ cannot be turned into Ct. Cl. 158. The federal practice is regulated by R. S. § 869. If a person causes* a subpoena to issue against another ostensibly to secure his attendance as a witness in a case, but in reality to compel him to pay a claim, it Hs an abuse of legal process; Dishaw v. Wadleigh, 15 App. Div. 205, 44 N. Y. Supp. 207. A court will, in a proper case, set aside a subpoena duces tecum became it is too broad; Hoppe v, W. R. Ostrander & Co„ 183 Fed. 786. A witness is guilty of contempt who, expecting to be subpoenaed, but before issue, concealed himself; Aaron v. State, 62 So. 419. A defendant who attempted to persuade one wanted as a witness to avoid service of the subpoena is guilty of a misdemeanor; [1913] Viet. L. R. 380. See Discovery; Production of Documents; Searches and Seizures. SUBREPTI0 (Lat.). In Civil Law. Obtaining gifts of escheat, etc., from the king by concealing the truth. Bell, Diet.; Calv. Lex. Subrip ere.