Case ID: scl_1/html/0480-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      The Court\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Adam and William Tunno against Rogers and M’Bride.
    Entries made in merchants Rooks, must be proved by the clerk who 5n the state!
    THIS Vvas an action of assumpsit for goods sold and de- # ° ' livered. Some part of the entries in the plaintiffs’ books, . ( r 1 were made in the - hand-writing of Mr. Monk, who was absent in Orangeburgh district. On the plaintiffs’ offering to produce proof of Monti's hand-writing, an objection was taken to it, as Monk himself was in the state, and within the reach of the process of the court, it not being the highest evidence of which the case was capable ; which objection,
   The Court

sustained, as coming within the rule of law laid down in the case of Fosters v. Sinkler, ante.