« PreviousContinue »
Snaith v. Mingay
Southampton (Mayor of)
v. Graves Spalding v. Mure Sparin v. Drax Sparry's case Spence v. Stuart
Swire v. Bell 362. 363
Sydenham v. Rand 4 Symonds v. Knox 163
Talbot v. Villeboys 330 Tanner v. Taylor 209 Taylor v. Cole 263
v. Hague 389
,. Royal Exchange
Spenceley v. Schullenberg 105
v. De Willott 210
Spencer v. Golding 95 Spieres v. Parser 150 Sponsenby's case 89 Stafford (Ld.)'s case 279 Stainer v. Burg, of Droit
wich 320 Stammers v. Dixon 421 Standen v. Standen 418 Stanley (Sir T.) v. White 132.
Stead v. Heaton 192 Stephens v. Crichton 11
Stevens v. Moss 180 Stone v. Bale 429 Stonehouse v. Evelyn 381 Stoytes v. Pearson 128
Stretch v. Wheeler 5 Strickland v. Ward 260 Stump v. Ayliffe 304 Sturdy v. Andrews 3. 4
Surtees v. Hubbard 342 Sutton v. Bishop 24
—1 v. Buck 118
Swan's case 278 Swendson's case 67 Swinnerton v. Marquis of Stafford 318
Company v. Scott
of) v. Bricknell
Assurance Company Thurle v. Madison Thurston v. Slatford 214. Thwaites v. Richardson Tiley v. Cowling Tilly's case Tinkler's case Tinkler v. Walpole Tinney v. Tinney Tisdale v. Essex (SirWm.) 407 Title v. Grevet 206 Tompson v. Smith 248 Tong's case 31.82.276 Took's case 138 Tooker v. Beaufort (D.) 282 Toole v. Medlicott Totty v. Nesbitt Towers v. Moore
v. Osborne (Sir J.) 408
Townsend v. Jves 378 Townsend
Townsend (Marquis) v.
Stangroom 450. 453. 455 Trelawnay v. Thomas 47 Trowel v. Castle 295 Tuckey v. Flower 321 Tuffhell v. Page 375 Turner v. Crisp 117
v. Eyles 158. 164
v. Gethin 329
v. Peart 96. 205
Tyley v. Cowling 232 Tyte v. Jones 386
Uhde v. Walters 433
Uncle v. Watson 182.194
Underhill v. Durham 304
Usher's case 89
Warriner v. (jiles
v. Bruce 409
Warwickshall's case 81. 83
i43 271 160 190 397
Watkins v. Towers
Weall v. King
West (Dr.)'scase 331- 33*
Levy Wheeler v. Lowth Wheeling's case Whelpdale's case Whitbread v. May Whitcombe v. Whiting Whitlocke v. Baker Whitewell v. Dimsdale Whitwell v. Bennett White's case White v. Cuyler —— ». Parkin
Woodcraft v. Kinaston
v. Wakeford 358
Wrottesley v. Bendish and
Wife 267 Wyatt v. Wilkinson 51 Wych v. Meal 266 Wyndham v. Lord Wycombe 140 v. Chetwynd 97.376
T R E A T I S E
LAW OF EVIDENCE.
PART THE FIRST.
THE arrangement, which has been adopted in the Pkntfthe following Treatise, is that which appeared the most Wl" simple and perspicuous. The work consists of two parts; the former, relating to parol or unwritten evidence; the latter, to written evidence. The subject of the first chapter is the method of compelling the attendance of witnesses for the purpose of being examined; and the five succeeding chapters treat of the causes, which render witnesses incompetent. In these, the writer has inquired into the several objections to witnesses, arising from want of reason or understanding, from defect of religious principle, from conviction of certain crimes or from infamy of character, from interest, and lastly that arising from the relation which subsists between a client and his counsel or his solicitor. After ascertaining whether the witness is competent to give evidence, the next question, that arises, is, what evidence ought to be given, and how the witness ought to be examined. The seventh chapter, therefore, treats of the general nature of proofs; and the eighth, of the regular mode of examining a witness. And the first
part then concludes with an inquiry into bills of exception and demurrers to evidence.
The second part, which relates to written evidence, treats of records, of the admissibility of verdicts, and judgments, and other judicial proceedings, and of the manner in which they are to be regularly proved. Public writings, not of a judicial nature, and the inspection of such writings, are next considered; after which, follows an inquiry into the proof of private writings, the requisite of stamps on written instruments; and, lastly, into the admissibility of parol evidence by which written instruments may be explained or varied.
CHAP. I. On the Attendance of Witnesses. AttM&nee TP HE process, which courts of law have instituted for
Ui civil case. JL r
the purpose of compelling the attendance of witnesses, is by the writ of subpoena ad testificandum. This writ commands the witness to appear at the trial to testify what he knows in the cause, under the penalty of i ool. to be forfeited to the king. And the stat. 5 Eliz. c. 9. s. 12. gives an additional remedy by enacting, that, " if any person (upon whom any process out of a court of record shall be served, to "testify concerning any cause or matter depending there, and having tendered to him according to his countenance or calling such reasonable sum of money for his costs and charges, as with regard to the distance of the place is necessary to be allowed,) do not appear according to the tenor of the process, not having a lawful and reasonable cause to the contrary; he shall forfeit for every such offence iol., and yield such further recompence to the party grieved, as by the discretion of the judge of the court, out of which the process issues, shall be awarded."