It

habit of reading it, the evidence would be of little avail. Leeson. v. Holt, 1 Stark. 186; see also Munn v. Baker, 2 Stark. 255. seems not to be necessary, in giving the gazette in evidence, to prove that it was bought of the gazette printer, or where it came from. Forsyth's case, Russ. and Ry. C. C. R. 277.

A paper from the secretary of state's office, transmitted by the British ambassador at a foreign court, and purporting to be a declaration of war by the government of that country, against another foreign state, is admissible for the purpose of showing the precise period of the commencement of the war. Theluson v. Cosling, 4 Esp. 266. The articles of war printed by the king's printer, are evidence of such articles, R. v. Withers, cited 5 T. R. 446, of which it seems the court will take judicial notice. Bradley v. Arthur, 4 B. and C. 304.

Effect of Public Books, &c.

Public books and documents are, in many instances, evidence of the facts there recorded. Thus the register of the Navy Office, with proof of the usage to return all persons dead, is evidence to prove the death of a sailor. B. N. P. 249. The book at Lloyd's stating the capture of a ship is evidence of such capture; but it is not evidence of notice of the loss, unless to a person who is a subscriber at Lloyd's, and in the habit of examining the books there. Abel v. Potts, 3 Esp. 242. The log-book of a man-of-war is evidence to prove the time of that vessel sailing as convoy, in an action on the insurance of another vessel. D'Israeli v. Jowett, 1 Esp. 427. The bank books are evidence to prove a transfer of stock. Breton v. Cope, Peake, 30. So the book from the master's office in K. B. to prove a person an attorney of that court, without production of the roll. R. v. Crossley, 2 Esp. 524. So the poll books at an election. Mead v. Robinson, Willes, 424. So the books of the King's Bench and Fleet prisons, are admissible to prove the dates of the commitment and discharge of prisoners; R. v. Aickles, Leach, C. L. 436; but not the cause of commitment, of which the commitment itself is the best evidence. Salte v. Thomas, 3 B. and

P. 188. The copy of an official paper, containing the number of passengers on board a vessel, made in pursuance of an act of parliament by the captain, and deposited at the India House, is admissible to show the number and description of the persons on board the vessels. Richardson v. Mellish, R. and M. 66. 2 Bingh. 229, S. C. Excise books, transcribed from the master's specimen paper, are evidence against him without calling the officers who have transcribed them, as it is said ex necessitate rei. R. v. Grimswood, 1 Price, 369. Entries in the books of the clerk of the peace, of deputations many years since granted to gamekeepers by the owner of a manor, are evidence to show that the party there

mentioned exercised the right of appointing gamekeepers by apply ing to the clerk of the peace to get certificates, without production of the deputation themselves. Hunt v. Andrews, 3 B. and A. 341;" see Rushworth v. Craven, 1 MC. and Y. 417. Returns of sales of corn under 1 and 2 Geo. IV. c. 87, are not conclusive evidence to show the parties to whom the corn was delivered. Woodley v. Brown, 2 Bingh. 527. An entry in a vestry book, stating that A. was duly elected treasurer of the parish, at a vestry duly held in pursuance of notice, is evidence of such election; R. v. Martin, 2 Campb. 100; and a wardmote book, to prove the election of a constable in the city of London. Underhill v. Witts, 3 Esp. 56. So in an action for disturbing the plaintiff in the enjoyment of a pew, claimed in right of his messuage, an old entry in the vestry book signed by the churchwardens, stating repairs of the pew by a former owner of the messuage (under whom the plaintiff claims), in consideration of his using it, is evidence to prove the plaintiff's title, for it is made by the churchwardens on a subject within the scope of their official authority. Price v. Littlewood, 2 Campb. 288. By stat. 17 Geo. II. c. 38, s. 14, true copies of all rates and assessments made for the relief of the poor are to be entered in a book provided for that purpose, by the churchwardens and overseers of every parish; and by stat. 42 Geo. III. c. 46, the particulars of parish indentures are directed to be entered in a book, which book shall be deemed sufficient evidence in courts of law of the existence and particulars of such indentures, in case it shall be proved that the originals are lost or destroyed. Corporation books are evidence between members and the corporation, but they are not evidence in favour of the corporation against a stranger: Mayor of London v. Mayor of Lynn, 1 H. Bl. 214 (n). Marriage v. Lawrence, 3 B. and A. 142; unless the entry be of a public nature. Per Abbott, C. J., ibid. R. v. Mothersell, 1 Str. 93. In an action by a corporation for tolls, entries in their own books are not admissible for them. Brett v. Beales, 1. M. and M. 429. Rolls or ancient books, in the herald's office, are evidence to prove a pedigree, but an extract of a pedi gree, proved to be taken out of records is not, because such extract is not the best evidence, as a copy of such records might be had. B. N. P. 248. King v. Forster, Sir T. Jones, 224. The herald's visitation books of counties are also evidence on a question of pedigree. Pitton v. Walter, 1 Str. 162 ; see Vin. Ab. Eu. (4. b. 39.) A general history may be given in evidence to prove a matter relating to the kingdom in general; B. N. P. 248. Vin. Ab. Ev. (A. b. 46); thus chronicles have been admitted to prove, that at a certain period King Philip had not assumed the style given him in a deed, Neale v. Fay, cited 1 Salk. 282. So Speed's Chronicle was admitted as evidence of the death of Edward the Second's queen.

5 Eng. Com. Law Reps. 312. 9 Id. 509. 5 Id. 245.

Brounker v. Atkins, Skin. 14. But a general history is not evidence to prove a particular custom. B. N. P. 248. Thus Camden's Britannia was held to be no evidence on an issue whether, by the custom of Droitwich, salt pits could be sunk in any part of the town. Stainer v. Burgesses of Droitwich, 1 Salk. 282. By the same principle under which entries in public books are admitted to prove the facts there stated, it has been held that the post-office marks, in town or country, proved to be such, are evidence that the letters, on which they are impressed, were in the office to which those marks belong, at the dates those marks specify. Plumer's case, Russ. and Ry., C. C. R. 264; and see Fletcher v. Braddyll, 3 Stark. 64. Archangelo v. Thompson, 2 Campb. 623. Cotton v. James, 1 M. and M. 276.

An almanack is good evidence to prove that a particular day was Sunday. Page v. Faucet, Cro. Eliz. 227.

Effect of Public Registers.

The registers of christenings, marriages, and burials, preserved in churches, or copies of them, are good evidence. B. Ñ. P. 247. Where it appeared, that the practice was to make entries in the general parish register once in three months, out of a day-book, in which the entries were made immediately after the christening or on the same morning, and in the day-book, after a particular entry, the letters B. B. (signifying base born) were inserted, which were omitted in the register, it was held that evidence of the day-book could not be received, for that there could not be two parish registers. May v. May, 2 Str. 1073. The register is no evidence of the identity of the parties. Birt v. Barlow, Dougl. 162; ante, p. 50. The books of the Ficet prison are not, as it seems, evidence to prove a marriage, for they are not made by public authority. Rejected by Ld. Kenyon, Read v. Passer, Peake, 231. 1 Esp. 213, S. C. By de Grey, C. J. Howard v. Burtonwood, Peake, 233 (n). By Lord Hardwicke and Lee, C. J. ibid. By Le Blanc, J. Cooke v. Lloyd, Peake Ev. Appx. 78. By Burrough, J. Doe v. Passingham, MS. Shrews. Sum. Ass. 1826. Said to have been admitted by Heath, J. Doe, dem. Passingham v. Lloyd, Shrews. Sum.. Ass. 1794, Peake, 231; and see Doe v. Madox, 1 Esp. 197. Lloyd v. Passingham, 16 Ves. 49. It seems, however, that declarations by the parties, that they have been married at the Fleet, are evidence of a marriage. Lawrence v. Dixon, Peake, 136. Reed v. Passer, id. 231. The copy of a register of a foreign chapel is not admissible in our courts to prove a marriage abroad; Leader v. Barry, 1 Esp. 353; nor of a dissenting chapel, since it is not a public document. Newham v. Raithby, 1 Phillimore, 315. So a copy of a register of Baptism kept in the island of Guernsey, is not admissible. Huet v. Le Mesurier, 1 Cox's Ca. 275.

An entry in a register of baptism, as to the time of a child's birth, is not evidence of the age. Wihen v. Law, 3 Stark. 63. R. v. Clapham, 4 C. and P. 29.5 Nor is the register of the christening of a child in a particular parish evidence, when unaccompanied by other circumstances, that the child was born in that parish. R. v. North Petherton, 5 B. and C. 508. An entry, by a minister, of a baptism which took place before he became minister, and of which he received information from the parish clerk, is not admissible, nor is the private memorandum of the fact made by the clerk who was present at the baptism. Doe v. Bray, 8 B. and C. 813. It seems that a bishop's register is evidence of the facts stated in it. Arnold v. Bp. of Bath and Wells, 5 Bingh. 316.*

Effect of Awards.

An award regularly made by an arbitrator to whom matters in difference are referred, is conclusive in an action at law on the parties to the reference, upon all matters inquired into within the submission. 1 Phill. Ev. 360; and see Campbell v. Twemlow, 1 Price, 81. Dunn v. Murray, 9 B. and C. 780. Thus where in an action of ejectment it appeared that the lessor of the plaintiff and the defendant had before referred their right to the land to an arbitrator, who had awarded in favour of the lessor, it was held, that the award concluded the defendant from disputing the lessor's title. Doe v. Rosser, 3 East, 11; see Chamb. Landl. and Ten. 267. But where on a reference by landlord and tenant, the arbitrator awarded, that a stack of hay left upon the premises by the tenant, should be delivered up by him to the landlord, upon the tenant being paid a certain sum, it was held, that the property in the hay did not pass to the landlord, on his tender of the money, by mere force of the award, against the consent of the tenant, who refused to accept the money, or deliver up the hay. Hunter v. Rice, 15 East, 100. Where the commissioners under an inclosure act were directed to make an award respecting the boundaries of a parish, and to advertise a description of the boundaries so fixed, and the boundaries so fixed were to be inserted in their award, and to be binding, final and conclusive, but the boundaries mentioned in the award varied from those which had been advertised, it was held, that the commissioners not having pursued their authority, their award was not binding as to the boundaries. R. v. Washbrook, 4

B. and C. 732.m An award made on a reference of all matters in difference between the parties, will not be a bar with regard to any demand which was not in difference between them at the time of the submission, nor referred by them to the arbitrators. Ravee v. Farmer, 4 T. R. 146. Smith v. Johnson, 15 East, 213. See Thorpe v. Cooper, 5 Bingh. 129."

Where no arbitration bonds had been entered into, but the arbi

14 Eng. Com. Law Reps. 153. 15 Id. 459. 1 17 Id. 498.

19 Id. 260. 11 Id. 290. i 15 Id. 339. 10 Id. 451. ☐ 15 Id. 387.

trators made an award, Eyre, C. J., admitted the award as evidence. under the account stated; Keen v. Batshore, 1 Esp. 194; and in assumpsit on a policy of insurance, Lord Kenyon admitted evidence that the defendant had agreed to be bound by an award to which other persons were parties, and that the award was in favour of the plaintiff. Kingston v. Phelps, Peake, 227.

As to the effect of presumptive evidence, hearsay, and admissions, see those titles respectively.

STAMPS.

Effect of want of Stamp.] An instrument requiring a stamp cannot be produced in evidence without being stamped, and if parties agree by parol to be bound by the same terms as those contained in a written instrument, the latter cannot be given in evidence unless properly stamped. Turner v. Power, 7 B. and C. 625. See Drant v. Brown, 3 B. and C. 665," Where an unstamped instrument in writing has been lost, R. v. Castlemorton, 3 B. and A. 588, or destroyed even by the party who objects to the want of the stamp, Rippener v. Wright, 2 B. and A. 478, parol evidence of the contents is inadmissible. But in some cases, in which an instrument has been lost, which is not proved to have been properly stamped, that fact may be presumed, as where an indenture of apprenticeship, executed thirty years before, was lost, it was presumed to have been properly stamped, though an officer from the stamp-office proved that it did not appear that any such indenture had been stamped. R. v. Long Buckley, 7 East, 45. And where a party refuses to produce an agreement after notice, it will be presumed as against him to be properly stamped. Crisp v. Anderson, 1 Stark. 35." Where the transaction is capable of being legally proved by other evidence than that of the instrument which ought to bear a stamp, such evidence may be resorted to. Thus, where a promissory note appears to be improperly stamped, the plaintiff may resort to the original consideration. Farr v. Price, 1 East, 58. Tyte v. Jones, id. (n). So, though an unstamped receipt is no evidence of payment, the fact of payment may be proved by a witness who was present. Rambert v. Cohen, 4 Esp. 213. So where an action is brought upon an instrument which ought to be stamped, and the form of the pleading is such, that at the trial it was not necessary to produce the instrument, a court of law will not examine whether the instrument is legally available with reference to the stamp laws. Per Lord Eldon, Huddlestone v. Briscoe, 11 Ves. 596.