Edmiston v. Schwartz
Edmiston v. Schwartz
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Before admitting a record as evidence, the court must be enabled to judge of the legal effect of the whole of it which may be different from that of a part; and a bare extract is therefore not the best evidence of which the case is susceptible. But the court will not pronounce evidence to be secondary where it does not appear on the face of it that better remains to be produced. Then from what is the court to judge whether an exemplication contains the whole record? Certainly from the certificate of the officer, whose business it was to authenticate it, and to whose acts, in this particular, full faith and credit are due. This much was decided in Ferguson v. Harwood, 7 Cranch, 408, where the terms of the certificate were more equivocal than in the case under eosideration. There the officer had certified, that the paper was “ truly taken from the record of the proceedings of Prince George’s county court:” here he has certified, that it is “ truly copied from the records of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland eounty;” and a true copy imports an entire copy. In that case, the record was authenticated according to the act of of congress, of 1790; but that act give’s to such authentication no greater or more conclusive effect than it would have without the aid of the act in the state from which the record was sent; so that the decision does not rest on any peculiar provision of the act of congress, but on the principles»of the common law. But it is not
Judgment reversed, and a venire facias de novo awarded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- EDMISTON against SCHWARTZ
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published