Wilhite v. Barr

67 Mo. 284
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedApril 15, 1878
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 67 Mo. 284 (Wilhite v. Barr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wilhite v. Barr, 67 Mo. 284 (Mo. 1878).

Opinion

Sherwood, O. J. —

Plaintiff sued in ejectment for lands in Polk county and had judgment. The only allegation of error is the admission of the county plat of Polk coun[286]*286ty to establish, who entered the land from the United States Government. This evidence was objected to for two reasons only: 1. That it was not properly certified. 2. That it had been changed since certified. The certificate is in these words:

United States Land Office, \ Springfield, Mo., August 10, 1868. j

“ I certify that the., within plat is a correct abstract of the records in this office.”

John S. Waddill, Register.

I. Section 11, p. 591,1 Wag. Stat., provides: “ Copies of any entry or entries or memoranda, made on the books of the office of any register or receiver of any United States land office certified by the said register or receiver to be correct, shall be received in evidence in the trial of any cause in any of the courts of this State.” It is evident that the register in his certificate used the word “ abstract” in the sense of “ copy.” While it is true that the certificate might have been more formal, yet we do not regard it as insufficient. (McClure v. McClurg, 53 Mo. 173.) And the manner in which the certificate is signed, sufficiently shows that Waddill was register, and signed the certificate in that capacity. No objection was made at the trial that no evidence was offered to show that Waddill was register at the time he made the certificate; any objection on that score will therefore be presumed to have been waived and cannot be raised here.

II. Relative to the second ground of objection, the addition to the plat of other entries after the entry of the premises in question had been properly made and certified, can, by no possibility effect the validity of such entry. We therefore affirm the judgment.

All concur.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Wilcox v. Phillips
97 S.W. 886 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1906)
Payne v. Lott
90 Mo. 676 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 Mo. 284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilhite-v-barr-mo-1878.