Taylor v. Hawkins

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Taylor v. Hawkins

12 S.C.L. 164

DecidedMay 15, 1821

StatusPublished

This text of 12 S.C.L. 164 (Taylor v. Hawkins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Taylor v. Hawkins, 12 S.C.L. 164 (S.C. 1821).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice' Colcock

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The evidence offered was competent, and should have been received. The private memorandum of an individual is of itself no evidence. When produced, it requires to be supported by an oath. It is considered as aiding the recollection of the witness, but not of the foundation of his knowledge : Thus the clerk who is called to prove a merchant’s sum, and introduces the book of original entries to refresh his memory. But he may prove the delivery of the goods without the book ; and in this case the witness may have proved the age of the defendant, (although such entry existed) from mere recollection of the fact of hie birth. In short it is the very best evidence which the nature of the case admits. If no other evidence could have been had, the memorandum, upon proof of the hand writing, may have been admitted. Even the declarations of a deceased parent have been admitted to prove the birth of a child. (Phillips, 178-9.)

The motion is granted.

Justices Nott, Richardson, Johnson and linger, concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice' Colcock

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The evidence offered was competent, and should have been received. The private memorandum of an individual is of itself no evidence. When produced, it requires to be supported by an oath. It is considered as aiding the recollection of the witness, but not of the foundation of his knowledge : Thus the clerk who is called to prove a merchant’s sum, and introduces the book of original entries to refresh his memory. But he may prove the delivery of the goods without the book ; and in this case the witness may have proved the age of the defendant, (although such entry existed) from mere recollection of the fact of hie birth. In short it is the very best evidence which the nature of the case admits. If no other evidence could have been had, the memorandum, upon proof of the hand writing, may have been admitted. Even the declarations of a deceased parent have been admitted to prove the birth of a child. (Phillips, 178-9.)

The motion is granted.

Justices Nott, Richardson, Johnson and linger, concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 S.C.L. 164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-hawkins-sc-1821.