Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1858-10-17

Opinions OF the Supreme Courts Of ahe state
OF 1enneSsees Delivered at Knoxville, az
september Term. 1855.

Opinions Of tho Supreme Court Of ahe state
% aenneSSees Delivered at Knoxville, at
september Term, 1885,
Nave rs Simpson
The defendant Maven the urial Of this cause
offered as evidence what purported 10 be surrey
OF The lands Of Giles Brooks Ia dizison amo z bis
heirs-made BY Joseph BrOvn, Surveyor nud slga-
ed oy Henry Tayl Tor. John Bayless, Calvin Finch.
William Calvert ana James Parker. This paper was
S'hout da'e and reeisd its face that it was made
/ in pursuance Of order Of the Comfy Court Of
Washington. Il was without caption, and the only
] evidence Of It's authenticity either as record or
PTlya,e paper was the following certificate:
The foregoing is true cory as appears Of re-
cord Ia ny Office, Feb 10Th, 1856. HESRY HoHs,
! CJerk"
! The reading of this paper was objected to BY
simpson, and the objection sustained BY The Court
In this We think there was no error. The Clerks
Ceriihcste Is defective in not showing from what
court the papers came Il has no caption and does
not appear to be he record of auy Court; nor that
II vas authorized, adopted in any suit or pro-
cediDg, in any Court Ehatever-hsvinp aui bori, in
he matter l Grsenl Ev, p SIS, 4a3 The said
Nave then applied for new trial: but this was de
MED By the Circuit Court lie based bis application
upon his own affidavit stating that he vas taken by
surprise IN the rejection of the suryey-the same
having been read without objection on he former
trial of the and further states that be applied
20 the Clerk BY one Henry Siger for said record and
that he though he had all of it. but DDS al Febuas
~ Sessions 1872 ofthe County Court the order for
said partition duly made and is Of record in
said Oihee-but in making out said record the Clerk
inadvertently onit ed this part of the record aud he
exhibits what purpOrts 70 be the copy Of an order
appointing the aforessId persons 80 lay of sud
divide Inc real estate Of Giles Brook, deceased in
the county of Washington, am ngst his heirs &C
eording to law, and that iseph Br wa surveyel and
run The lines Of The sam" This Is Ger fled 10 be
true copy as appears Of record in his Office Feb
ruary Term, 1872. by Henry Ioss, Clerk Of the
County Court, of Washii goR county. He also ex-
hibits certified cory Of said survey ard The sum-
mons issued and executed upon the Surveyor and
Commissioners TO make said division The simmons
having issued aud been executed upon he Surveyor
aud Commissioners 10 make said division. The
summons having issued and been executed in 1872;
but al these supposed records are without any cap
ton and do not appear aave been had in any in ii
eial proceeding or ~ the authority Of any Z urf;
aud are subject to many Of the objections taken o
The survey rejected by the Court The Circuit Judge
acted prOperly 10 rriu-i < n trial A parry
cannot be heard TO say h was surprised By the re
jec ion Of illegal evidence By the Court Cooke 247
Z49; Hum 2Z2-224 Aud f these papers exist in
the form Of records 90 10 be admissible as evi
dence, the defendant Was certainly guilty Of great
neglect in not having them in due form % be used
on the trial Nor can grant q new trial bee .use
Of the mistake made by the register IN copying the
deed made from Baoiel Dsacous 20 Robert Hampton
It is stated in the bill Of exceptions By the Court
as reason for refusing new trial 90 this point
that it was the opinion Of the Court from othr facts
proven IN the cEuse that the date Of said deed was
wholly mmateTial These other facts are not set out
in the record ADD we are 10 presume that the
Circuit Judges opinion and action were proper IN
less shown TO be erroneous.
Judgment affirmed. WRIGHr.