Corbus

(after stating the facts as above).

1. The objections presented by the first assignment of error are based upon the ground that the testimony of Dr. Leonhardt comes within the provisions of section 858, Rev. St. (28 U.S.C.A. 631 note), and that by this section he was not a competent witness to any transactions and conversations between himself and defendant’s intestate. We are of opinion that the court did not err in admitting the testimony objected to. It is perhaps true, as claimed by the plaintiff in error, that there is no decision directly in point, but the decisions bearing upon the general question lead us to the conclusion that section 858 does not apply to territorial courts. Good v. Martin, 95 U.S. 90, 98 , 24 L.Ed. 341 ; McAllister v. U. S., 141 U.S. 174 , 11 S.Ct. 949 , 45 L.Ed. 693 ; Thiede v. Utah, 159 U.S. 510, 515 , 16 S.Ct. 62 , 40 L.Ed. 237 ; The Coquitlam v. U. S., 163 U.S. 346, *764 351 , 16 S.Ct. 1117 , 41 L.Ed. 184 ; Jackson v. U. S., 42 C.C.A. 452 , 102 F. 473, 479 .

In Good v. Martin, supra, the court said: “Territorial courts are not courts of the United States, within the meaning of the constitution, as appears by all the authorities. Clinton v.…