Whitfield v. . Walk

It was decided some time ago at Fayette-vilie, in a case similar to the present, that such testimony as is now offered, namely, proof of the hand-writing of the clerk and Iiis absence from this , state, was admissable; but the contrary has been decided since by the opinion of the greater part of the judges in this state, therefore it cannot be received.

The plaintiff then gave other evidence and had a verdict.1