United States Gooding

Decision Date16 March 1827
Citation12 Wheat. 460,6 L.Ed. 693,25 U.S. 460
PartiesThe UNITED STATES against GOODING
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

At the trial in the Circuit Court, the United States offered evidence that the defendant purchased of one McElderry the vessel called the General Winder, in the indictment mentoined, and that said vessel was built in the port of Baltimore, also in the said indictment mentioned. They further offered in evidence, that at the time said purchase was made, the said vessel was not completely finished, and that the same was finished under the superintendence of a certain Captain John Hill, who was appointed by the defendant master of said vessel on her then intended voyage. They also offered in evidence, that the defendant was, at the time when the offence laid in the indictment is charged to have been committed, and at the time of his purchase of the said vessel, and ever since has been, a citizen of the United States, and has constantly, from the time of the purchase of the said vessel, till the present period, been an actual resident of the said port of Baltimore.

They further offered evidence, that after the said purchase, and after the appointment of the said captain Hill as master as aforesaid, the said Hill ordered various fitments for the said vessel at the said port of Baltimore, which said fitments were furnished for said vessel, and afterwards, on the order of said Hill, were paid for by the defendant. They also offered in evidence, that some of these fitments were peculiarly adapted for the slave trade, and are never put on board any other vessels than those intended for such trade; a part of such fitments so ordered by captain Hill and paid for by the defendant, to wit, three dozen of brooms, eighteen scrapers, and two trumpets, were actually put on board the General Winder in the port of Baltimore, the residue of the equipments on board the General Winder at the time of her departure, being such as are usual on board vessels carrying on trade between said port and the West Indies. And the rest of such fitments, peculiar to the slave trade as aforesaid, were shipped at the said port of Baltimore, on board another vessel called the Pocahontas, chartered by the defendant: That the said vessel called the General Winder, sailed from the port of Baltimore, fitted as aforesaid, and with the said Hill as master, on or about the twenty-first day of August, eighteen hundred and twenty-four, having cleared for the island of St. Thomas in the West Indies. That the other vessel called the Pocahontas also sailed for St. Thomas from the port of Baltimore, with the part of the said fitments put on board her as before mentioned, some time in the month of September following. They also gave evidence that both the said vessels, the General Winder and the Pocahontas, afterwards arrived at St. Thomas, and that at that island the said peculiar fitments shipped as aforesaid in the Pocahontas, were there transhipped...

To continue reading

Request your trial
178 cases
  • In re Yasiel R.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • August 18, 2015
    ...to the facts of the particular case in order to determine the proper evidentiary rule. See, e.g., United States v. Gooding, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 460, 469, 6 L. Ed. 693 (1827) (The court rejected the defendant's claim that the witness' testimony regarding certain admissions made by the defend......
  • Local 1814, Intern. Longshoremen's Ass'n, AFL-CIO v. N.L.R.B.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • July 20, 1984
    ...See, e.g., American Fur Co. v. United States, 27 U.S. (2 Peters) 358, 364, 7 L.Ed. 450 (1829); United States v. Gooding, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 460, 469-70, 6 L.Ed. 693 (1827) (Story, J.). The scope of employment doctrine has found frequent articulation in the NLRA context. In the seminal case......
  • Jelke v. United States
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • March 2, 1918
    ......545; United States. v. Keitel, 211 U.S. 370, 29 Sup.Ct. 123, 53 L.Ed. 230;. United States v. Rabinowich, 238 U.S. 78, 35 Sup.Ct. 682, 59 L.Ed. 1211; United States v. Hirsch, 100. U.S. 33, 25 L.Ed. 539; Curley v. United States, 130. F. 1, 64 C.C.A. 369; United States v. Gooding, 12. Wheat. 460, 6 L.Ed. 693; Rosen v. United States, 161. U.S. 29, 16 Sup.Ct. 434, 480, 40 L.Ed. 606; Pettibone v. United States, 148 U.S. 198, 13 Sup.Ct. 542, 37 L.Ed. 419; Perrin v. United States, 169 F. 17, 94 C.C.A. 385; Dunbar v. United States, 156 U.S. 195, 15. Sup.Ct. 325, 39 ......
  • Bourjaily v. United States
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 23, 1987
    ...admissibility of co-conspirators' statements was first established in this Court over a century and a half ago in United States v. Gooding, 12 Wheat. 460, 6 L.Ed. 693 (1827) (interpreting statements of co-conspirator as res gestae and thus admissible against defendant), and the Court has re......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Conditional Rules in Criminal Procedure: Alice in Wonderland Meets the Constitution
    • United States
    • Georgia State University College of Law Georgia State Law Reviews No. 26-2, December 2009
    • Invalid date
    ...then there was not only an evidentiary error, there was also a violation of the right of confrontation."). 15. United States v. Gooding, 25 U.S. 460 (1827) (interpreting statements of co-conspirator as res gestae and thus admissible against defendant); Mueller, supra note 12, at 325 (tracin......
  • THE REASONABLENESS OF THE "REASONABLENESS" STANDARD OF HABEAS CORPUS REVIEW UNDER THE ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996.
    • United States
    • Case Western Reserve Law Review Vol. 72 No. 3, March 2022
    • March 22, 2022
    ...put the matter: "My own error, however, can furnish no ground for its being adopted by this Court.... " United States v. Gooding, 12 Wheat. 460, 478.... If there are other ways of gracefully and good-naturedly surrendering former views to a better considered position, I invoke them (151.) S......
  • Preliminarily Guilty? Reflexive Confrontation Forfeiture
    • United States
    • University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Law Review No. 50, 2022
    • Invalid date
    ...1768). 142. Matthew Hale, The History and Analysis of the Common Law of England 256-57 (Savoy, J. Nutt 1713). 143. Id. at 259-60. 144. 25 U.S. 460 145. United States v. Gooding, 25 U.S. 460, 469 (1827); see also Case of Fries, 9 F. Cas. 924, 931-32 (C.C.D. Pa. 1800) (No. 5,127) (explanation......
  • The Expanding Use of the Res Gestae Doctrine
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Lawyer No. 38-6, June 2009
    • Invalid date
    ...2. McCormick on Evidence § 268 (6th ed., 1992). 3. Id. 4. Leeds v. Marine Ins. Co., 15 U.S. 380 (1817). 5. United States v. Gooding, 25 U.S. 460 (1827). 6. F.R.E. 801(d)(2)(D) (agent) and 801(d)(2)(E) (co-conspirator). 7. Proprietors of Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of Warren Bridge, ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT