midpage

State v. LoughlinState v. Loughlin

Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Jun 5, 1890
Reporters:
,
Before:
Blodgett
Blodgett, J.

It is a general principle, that whenever documents or books of a public ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‍nature ‘would of themselves be evidence if produced, their contents may be proved by immediate copies, duly verified (Forsaith v. Clark, 21 N. H. 409, 419) ; and when the ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‍proof may be by a copy, an examined copy, duly made and sworn to by any competent witness, or a copy certified by the officer having legal ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‍custody of the book or document, is alike admissible. Whitehouse v. Bickford, 29 N. H. 471; State v. Lynde, 77 Me. 561; 1 Gr. Ev., s. 485; Best Ev. (Morgan’s ed.) ss. 485, 486 ; 1 Stark. ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‍Ev. (3d ed.) 226; Abb. Tr. Ev. 50.

No objection appearing to the competency of Chase as a witness, the copy of the record made and sworn ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‍to by him was properly admitted.

Fxceptions overruled.

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Loughlin
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jun 5, 1890
Citations: 20 A. 981; 66 N.H. 266
Court Abbreviation: N.H.
Log In