Source: http://il.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19591112_0040048.C07.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2016-10-23 20:39:29
Document Index: 469109268

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1819', '§ 4332', '§ 274', '§ 2630', '§ 10', '§ 882', '§ 1733', '§ 2161']

| United States v. Skiba
United States v. Skiba
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.WALTER E. SKIBA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
To support the allegation in the indictment that the bank where the alleged robbery took place was insured under Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Harold M. Kirkdorffer, assistant cashier of the bank, testified that it was operating under said exhibit 2, which reads as follows:
Hereby certifies that pur-
suant to the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act of the Con-
gress of the United States
each depositor is provided
BRISTOL, INDIANA*fn1*fn2
In testimony whereof, wit-
ness my signature and the
seal of the Corporation this
21st day of September, 1950.
Mabel T. Harl
Attest:E. F. Downey
§ 1819 of said act provides, inter alia :
"* * * the Corporation shall become a body corporate and as such shall have power -
In Wynne v. United States, 217 U.S. 234, 30 S. Ct. 447, 54 L. Ed. 748, the question arose as to the competency of certain evidence relied upon to establish the national character of a vessel, upon which a murder had been committed, in the harbor of Honolulu, Territory of Hawaii. A certificate of enrollment, purporting to have been issued at San Francisco by one Coey, "acting deputy collector of customs," initialed "W," and signed by E. W. Marlin, deputy naval officer, as required by § 4332, Rev.Stat., 46 U.S.C.A.§ 274, which recited that the vessel was solely owned by the National Oil and Transportation Company, a corporation organized under the laws of California, was introduced for the purpose of establishing that the vessel was of American nationality. The principal objection was that this certificate was not the original, but a copy not sufficiently authenticated. It appeared to be authenticated as a true copy by "N. S. Farley, Deputy Collector of Customs. W." [Seal] At page 246 of 217 U.S., at page 450 of 30 S. Ct., the court said:
"The appointment of deputy collectors is provided for by §§ 2630, 2633, Rev.Stat. [19 U.S.C.A. §§ 10, 37] By § 882, Rev.Stat., [28 U.S.C.A. § 1733] copies of any papers or documents, in any of the executive departments, under the seal of the proper department, are made admissible in evidence equally with the original.
"There was no evidence whatever casting suspicion upon the genuiness of the copy or of the seal or the signature of Farley, and none which challenged of the ship. Under such circumstances and for the purposes of this case it was not error to assume that the document was genuinely executed by Farley, that he was what he claimed to be, a deputy collector of customs, and that his signature had been signed by himself or one authorized to sign for him. 3 Wigmore Ev. § 2161."