With respect to the modes of proof,the first anti principal rule is, that the best evidence of which the nature of the caso admits must bo adduced; and that a party must not attempt to rely on what is termed secondary evidence, at least without proving that the former cannot Be adduced, and why; as on account of actual destruction of an original deed, or loss, after most diligent search, and subpoenaing every person wl^o is at all likely to have the best evidence in his custody or power to produce the same; and even then a jury will sometimes suspect that the best evidence is withheld, and will find a verdict against the party entirely on that account; and, consequently, in adducing secondary evidence, the utmost attention must be given to satisfy the jury that there is no suppression of, or want of exertion to obtain, the best description of proof. 3 Chitt. Gen. Prac. 809. See Coman et al. v. The State, Nov. term, 1836, post.

It is of no avail merely to serve a third person, who is a stakeholder, with notice to produce a document; but ho must be subpoenaed to produce the same. Parry v. May, 1 Mood. & Rob. 279.