Woosrss v. HANDYs _ 57
2. Dcposiiions admitted in evidence by stipulation; There were, in
each one of suits Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and S, depositions admitted in
evidence, by stipulation or order, whichlwere not taken in the case in
which they were so admitted. They number in all 150 depositions,
and the fees for them, at $2.50 each, are $375. Those fees were dis-
allowed on taxation. In suits Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 6 there was a stipu-
lation that the depositions of two persons, taken in suits Nos. 1, 9,
and 10, might be put in evidence by the defendants, in suits Nos. 2,
3, 5, and 6, "with the same force and effect as if" those two persons
"were personally examined herein and testified as they have testified
in said depositions;" and that the depositions of two other persons,
theretofore taken in suits Nos. 1, 9, and 10, might “be read upon the
final hearing,". in suits Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 6, "with the same force and
effect as if duly taken," in suits Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 6, "on the part of
complainant? In suits Nos. 4 and 5 there was a stipulation that all
the evidence taken in suit No. 3 "be admitted as evidence" in suits Nos.
4 and 5, "subject to all objections entered in the record" in suit No. 3,
"with the same force and effect as if said evidence had been adduced"
in suits Nos. 4 and 5; and that the evidence of two persons, thereto-
fore taken in suit No. 10, "be admitted as evidence" in suit No. 5.
In suit N o. 6 there was a stipulation that the deposition of one per-
son, taken in suit No. 3, be considered as taken in suit No. 6, "for
the purposes thereof." In suit No. 7 an order was made, on consent
of both parties, that all of the evidence theretofore taken on behalf
of either party, in suits Nos. 2, 3, and 4, "be treated as evidence" in
suit No. 7, on behalf of the party "who introduced and took the
same" in suits Nos. 2, 3, and 4, "with the same effect (except on
question of costs) as if duly taken" in suit No. 7. In suit No. 8 an
order was made, on consent of both parties, that the proofs thereto-
fore taken in suits Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 7 "be admitted as evidence for
Hnal hearing," in suit No. 8.
The defendants contend that, by these stipulations in the suits
other than No. 7, it was agreed that the depositions should be treated
in all respects as if taken in the respective suits into which they were
admitted; that, independently of such agreement, the fee was taxable
in all the cases in which the depositions were admitted in evidence;
and that there is nothing in the stipulation in suit No. 7 which varies
that rule.
In Dedekam. v. Vase, 3 Blatchf. C. C. 77, in 1853, in this court, it was
held by Mr. Justice Nsnson and Judge Bsrurs, in an appeal in admi-
ralty, that the fee of $2.50 could not be taxed for a deposition taken
in the district court and read in evidence in this court, at the hear-
ing, from the apostles. V
In Sttmpson v. Brooks, Id. 456, in 1856, in this court, it was held
by Judge Bmrs that the fee was not taxable for a deposition taken
and admitted as evidence on the hearing of a motion for a prelimi-
nary injunction.