Georgia.-By application to superior court, an order for taking the testimony de bene esse may be obtained and filed in that court. Illinois. The Circuit Court on petition may allow a dedimus or commission either within or out of the state. The depositions when returned must be recorded by the clerk and then delivered to the party taking. Indiana.-No answer. Iowa.-No answer. Kentucky.—The Circuit Court, on petition and after notice to the parties interested, makes an order for the examination. in the usual mode. Depositions thus taken are filed with the clerk as in other equitable actions, and may be used in any subsequent action between the expected parties or their representatives, subject to all just exceptions. Maine.-A probate judge, justice of peace, notary, or the clerk of the Supreme Court, on a written application, and after notice to the persons named therein as interested, may take such depositions, which may be filed and recorded in the Registry of Deeds, and the depositions or copies may afterwards be used. If the depositions are to be taken out of the state, the application may be to the Supreme Court, which orders a commission on interrogatories filed after notice to the parties named. Maryland.-No answer. Massachusetts.-On application to two justices of the peace, of whom one must be a judge of probate, clerk of Supreme Court, master in chancery, or a counselor-at-law, and notice to the adverse parties therein named, the depositions may be taken by them in the usual modes, and, with the application and their certificate, recorded in the Registry of Deeds. The depositions or certified copies may afterwards be used in any suit against the parties so notified or persons claiming under them. Depositions out of the state in such case may be taken on application to the Supreme Court, and upon interrogatories on sufficient cause shown. Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska.-No answers. New Hampshire.-On petition to a court of record or two justices of the peace, one of whom must be of the quorum, and notice by them to the persons interested, depositions may be taken in the usual way, and when returned, may be recorded in the Registry of Deeds, and used in subsequent suits concerning the same matter and parties. New Jersey. No answer. New York.-Provisions exist similar to the ordinary mode. Ohio. A judge of the Court of Common Pleas, on petition filed in that court, may forthwith order the examination, directing the time and place and the notice to be given to the persons named as interested. When it is shown that notice cannot be given, he must appoint an attorney to examine witnesses for them, whose fee shall be taxed in the costs. The depositions, if approved by the judge, are filed with the clerk, and the depositions or certified copies may be given in evidence in any trial between the parties named or their privies in interest, subject to exceptions for irrelevancy or incompetency. Pennsylvania. The English chancery practice, by bill to perpetuate, etc. Rhode Island.—Any judge of Supreme Court or master in chancery, it seems, may take depositions to perpetuate, either before or after commencement of a suit. They are to be taken in the usual way, returned to the clerk of the Supreme Court, and recorded. But see Remington vs. Peckham, 10 Rhode Island, 550. South Carolina.-No answer. Vermont.-A judge of the Supreme or the County Court, on petition and notice to the adverse party, may take such depositions or grant a commission to take depositions out of the state. When returned, they are recorded by the county clerk, and they or certified copies are admissible in any subsequent suit against the same party or any claiming under him. West Virginia and Wisconsin.-No answer from either. Vice-President of the American Bar Association, CINCINNATI, July 19, 1880. DEAR SIR: Referring to the annexed resolution adopted by the Association, I venture to ask the favor that you will assist the Committee on Judicial Administration, by sending to me, as early as practicable, a brief answer as to the statute or practice, in the state of upon the following points: 1. What modes of proceeding are allowed, whether by commission from court, or mere notice inter partes, or otherwise? 2. Especially, what officers or persons may execute such duties; and by whom or how designated for the occasion? 3. What power to compel witnesses to testify upon a commission or notice from another state or country, and to whom is it given? 4. Whether the examination must be upon interrogatories previously filed, or may it be oral; and must the names of the witnesses to be examined be communicated? 5. Who may be present, and what formalities must be observed in the examination? May the officer reject testimony offered? What are his powers generally? 6. To whom and how must the deposition be returned and publication made? If it be inconvenient to comply personally, will you be so good as to place this in the hands of a competent person for reply. If it can be returned early in August, you will greatly oblige, dear sir, Yours, very respectfully, Resolved, That the Committee on Judicial Administration and Remedial Procedure be, and they are hereby instructed to inquire and report to the Association, at its next Annual Meeting, upon the present condition of the law, as well statutory as established by judicial decisions in the several states, touching the mode of taking testimony and of perpetuating testimony out of court, with special reference to the class of officers authorized to take such testimony, and the power confided to them, and the formalities required for the same; and to make such suggestions on the general subject as to them may seem expedient, with reference to the expediency of any action on the part of this Association in respect to the same. MAJORITY REPORT ON THE RELIEF OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS. To the American Bar Association : At your Annual Meeting, held in August, 1881, at Saratoga, the following resolution was adopted: Resolved, That a special committee, consisting of the President, the President for the next year, and seven other members, to be appointed by the President, be appointed, with instructions to inquire into what adequate remedy can be provided for the delays now incident to the final determination of suits pending in the highest courts in the United States, with power to prepare, and in their discretion to print, their report or reports with all convenient speed, and that all the pending resolutions, substitutes, and amendments on this subject be referred to said committee. The committee appointed under this resolution consisted of Messrs. Phelps, of Vermont (President of the Association); Clarkson N. Potter, of New York (President elect); Charles S. Bradley, of Rhode Island; John W. Stevenson, of Kentucky; Cortlandt Parker, of New Jersey; R. T. Merrick, of Washington City; Alex. R. Lawton, of Georgia; Rufus King, of Ohio; and Henry Hitchcock, of Missouri. This committee, of which Mr. Phelps was chosen chairman and Mr. King secretary, met at New York on September 19 and 20, and again at Washington City on December 14, 15, and 16, where they had the privilege of conferring freely with the justices of the Supreme Court and prominent |