, 1882-08-11
PUGET SOUND ARGUS.
General Land Office Decisions,
FLETCHER VS.. SHEPARD.

ErideRce. - Dispositions filed. after the
rendition of the decision of the local
officers cannot be considered as evi-
dence.
COPY IF Registry, Copies of reglSStrles
kept in a foreign country are lnadmls,,
sible to prove the recltaIs contained
therein, unless it he shown that the
registry was kept in accordance with
the laws of that country.
Date of Bith.- Even where admissible,
the, are in the matter of baptism, evi-
dence only of the date of baptism, but
may be accepted WiM otter eridence
to establish the date of birth,
COMMISSIONER MCFARLAND to Reg. and
Rec, Marquette, Micigan, July 10,
1882, tP, H. S.
l have considered the case of Jo-
seph Fletcher Us. Israel Shepard, on
appeal by plaintiff, which was origi-
naily decided by this Office April 6,
1881. The S. Wa of N. E. SEQ. Z,
Tp. 46 n, r. l f., was awarded to
Shepard, and the w. ! N. W. /, and
S. Z. ! of N. W. / said section to
Fletcher
A rehearing was ordered September
3, 1881, upon application OF Shepard,
to be limited to an inquiry as to the
age of Fletcher June 7, 1878, the date
Of his homestead entry,
December 5, 1881, was fixed for
hearing, prior to which time the dep
ositions of witnesses were filed III be-
half of both parties,
The depositions of Fletcher's pa
rents, and of John Fletcher and Blair
McCracken, although taken Novem-
ber 20, in ample time for filing prior
to the day of trial, were not fled un-
til December 15, 1881, after the rem
dition of your decision, They cannot
therefore be received or considered as
evidence in the case. r' re-
In behalf of Shepard the testimony
Of witnesses is introduced for the
purpose of showing by the declara-
tions of plaintiffs father, made prior
to any litigation, that said plaintiff
was not of age at the date of entry,
cannot be admitted as against interest
to affect this plaintiff; they are the
mere unsworn statements of q party
having no legal interest in the contro-
versy, and as such come within the
rule excluding "hearsay," and, the
declarant being alive and accessible,
they are not within the modification
of that rule which admits it to prove
pedigree 4"
Excluding this testimony, Shep-
ards case rests entirely upon the
deposition of Rev. John Fletcher, to
which are attached as exhibits, copies
of the parochial register Of a mission
in Canada, wherein the Fletcher fam
lily resided. Hi
In order to render such registries
admissible as evidence of the matters
recited in them, it must be shown that
they were made in accordance with
law. /. Wharton's Evidence, p. 653;
L Greenleaf, p. 493, and cases cited.
See also II Ohio, p. 453, where it was
held that copy of a record kept in
a foreign country is not admissible
unless it be shown that the, record
was kept in conformity with the laws
of that country ,df,8s 5.s a'l 9ea.,
Even where such records are ad
missible, they are in the matter of
baptisms evidence only of the date
Of baptism (Wharton, p. 655; Green
leaf, p. 493), although they may be
accepted igith other evidence to prove
the date Of birth. Ibid; Wlitcher
az. Mclaughlin, 115 Mass, 167.
1t is not shown in this case by what
authority the register, extracts from
which were filed, was kept, and hence
that record, SO far as it refers to Jo-
seph Fletcher must be rejected.
Accepting the evidences of Rev.
John Fletcher, and of Thomas Hand,
the latter one of Fletcher 'soWnrwiti
nesses, as sufficient to establish the
date of the marriage of contestants
parents in 1855, and that they had a
son William born before Joseph, who
was baptized in 1856, it does not nee
essarily follow that Joseph was. born
at such date as would render him a
minor at the time Of his entryin juno,
1878. A) ~ 1T
The burden of proof was upon
Shepard, and as he has failed to estab-
lish the point in controversy by COM
petent evidence, j must sustain the
appeal, and decline to modify my de
cislon of April 6, 1881. ,o
1t is not generally known that the
department Of The interior has recent