Case Name: Banta v. Banta
Court: New York Court of Chancery
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1839-03-12
Citations: 3 Edw. Ch. 295
Docket Number: 
Parties: Banta v. Banta.
Judges: 
Reporter: Edwards' Chancery Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 295–296

Head Matter:
Banta v. Banta.
March 12, 1839.
Divorce. Deposition in master’s office.
In adultery cases, masters should not rely on depositions prepared and brought to them; but must take down the testimony from the witnesses themselves.
Where parties had been married only about two months, and a bill was then filed and adultery was deposed to by an ignorant prostitute, a decree was not granted (although the bill had been taken as confessed.)
Bill for divorce, a vinculo matrimonii, on the ground of adultery. It had been taken as confessed. The master reported in favor of a divorce ; but the only testimony taken was a deposition of one Ann Lee. She swore that she knew both the parlies to this suit; and that the defendant had had connection with her in a house of ill fame. This was all the deposition contained; and she made her mark to it.
The marriage of the complainant and defendant took place on the ninth day of February, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight: and the bill was filed about the twenty-fourth day of April in the same year.
The cause now came up on the master’s report.
Mr.-, for the complainant.

Opinion:
The Vice-Chancellor :
Here is a case of marriage, the commission of adultery, and bill filed, all within the space of three months. The only witness to prove the adultery is a common prostitute, who swears it was committed with herself. She says she knows both the parties, complainant and defendant. Why was she not interrogated, as to how and when she became acquainted with the complainant, as well as with the defendant ? There is something extraordinary in this testimony, coming as it does from such a witness. Besides, the manner in which the deposition is written, is very suspicious. It appears as if it had been prepared in anticipation that some female might be found who would be willing to swear to it; and Ann Lee, being found, her name was inserted, and she then swore to it before the master ! Such a practice, if it was adopted in this instance, ought not to be tolerated. The master should take down the examination of w¿lnegs himself, as the answers are given to the questions propounded; and not rely upon a deposition previously prepared and brought to him : especially where the witness is illiterate, of no moral character, and of doubtful veracity. As at present advised, upon such testimony as is here presented, I cannot make a decree.