Case Name: James Drummond, vs. Samuel Hyams, and M. K. Hyams
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1824-01
Citations: 1 Harp. 268
Docket Number: 
Parties: James Drummond, vs. Samuel Hyams, and M. K. Hyams.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 268–269

Head Matter:
James Drummond, vs. Samuel Hyams, and M. K. Hyams.
Shoemaker’s book, to which entries were transferred from a slate, without proving who made the entries on the slate, or that they were daily transferred, not evidence.
This was an action on an open account, by a shoemaker, for boots and shoes, said to be de ivered to the defendants, The plaintiff produced his books; and the clerk who made the entries, on being sworn, stated that the entries were copied from a slate kept in the store, on which the original entries were made. On being cross-examined, he stated that the items were not always copied into the books on the day on which the ■entries were made on the slate,, and he could not say that the items in question were copied into the book on the day on which they were entered on the slate, nor could he say by whom they had been made on the slate, nor could he prove the delivery of the boots and shoes, The plaintiff was non-suited by the Res «order. A motion is now submitted to set aside that non-suit.-
Bay, JYott, Cohort, and Johnson, Justices, concurred:

Opinion:
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice' Huger.
A shoe-maker's books are not evidence at common law, nor' are they made so by statute, the practice however of receiving them as such has too long prevailed in this state to be now disturbed; but it must be confined to the limits hitherto assigned it. The original entries must be produced. It is not enough to produce the copy of an original entry, made by we know not whom, to entitle the plaintiff to recover.
The motion is therefore refused.