Ch. II. f. 2. Surveys and Hob. 188. Ev. 78. Surveys, taken on public occafions, are evidence to afcertain une rights of individuals Inquifitions. not named in them: thus doomfday-book, which was a furvey of the King's lands, made in the time of William the Conqueror, is the ouly evidence to prove whether a manor is held in ancient demefne, that is, whether it was part of the foccage tenure in the hands of Edward the Confeffor, or not; and fo high is the credit of this book, that the inspection Gilb. Law is made by the Court. So if a question arise as to the extent of the Ports, there lies in the Exchequer a particular furvey which afcertains it; and in many inftances, where a commiffion has been confined to a particular place, it has been received as admiffible evidence; as where a commiffion iffued out of the ExBurr.146. chequer in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, directing commiffioners to enquire whether a prior was feized of certain lands, as parcel of a manor; and whether, after the diffolution of the priories, the crown was feized, with di-. rections to fummon a jury, an inquifition taken under it, and the depofitions of the witneffes were held to be admiffible, though not conclufive evidence of the fact. In like manner an inquifition taken in the time of the ComK. B. Sit monwealth, by order of the then exifting gotings after Eat. Term vernment, to afcertain the extent of lands 39 G. 3. belonging to the Prebend of the moor of St. Paul's, was received against a perfon claim Tooker v. Duke of Beaufort, Doe dem. Powell v. Append. ing under them as evidence of the extent of their rights; and that taken under the direction of the Houfe of Commons in the year 1780, as conclufive evidence of the tenure and fees of the different offices noticed in it. And even when the commiffion has been loft, the furvey taken under it has been allowed as evidence. Thefe, and many other cafes of a fimilar nature, have proceeded on the ground that the act being done under the direction of the public, for the purpofe of determining a public queftion, they are entitled to a degree of credit which no act of an individual is. Ch. II. f. 2. Inquifitions. Green . Peake N.P. 182. vicar of Killing ton v. Tr. Col. Wilf. 370. Blac. 437. Jones v. White, Inquifitions taken before the fheriff, &c. on ordinary occafions, are of very different au- Vide 2 H. thority; they are in their nature traverfable, and are therefore feldom admitted as evidence against third perfons. In one cafe, the Court of King's Bench were equally divided on the question, whether the Coroner's Inqueft, whereby a man was found to be non compos mentis, was admiflible againft his executrix as evidence of his infanity; and in a much later cafe it was determined, that an inquifition taken by the fheriff, to afcertain to whom goods feized by him, under an execution againft A. belonged, by which the property was found to be in B. was no evidence in his favour in an action brought by him against the theriff, who had been indemnified by the cre- . ditor. Latkow v. Eamer, 2 H. Black. 437. Ch.II. f.z. Miller, 4 Burr. The register kept in churches of births, marriages and burials, is alfo evidence, and in all civil cafes, except actions for criminal couverfation, a marriage may be proved by Morris v. reputation; but in this cafe, and on indictments for bigamy, either fome perfon prefent must be called, or the original register, or an examined copy of it produced (t), and the parties may be identified by any one acquainted with them, whether prefent at the marriage or not.' But the books of the Fleet, however corroborated by other circumstances, 2057. 'Birt v. Barlow, Dougl. 162. are (t) In May v. May, 2 Stra. 1073, on a queftion of legitimacy, it appeared that a general regifter book was kept in the parish, into which the entries of baptifm were made every three months, from a day-book into which they were made at the tine. In the day-book were put the letters B B, which were said to fignify base born; but these letters were not inferted in the register-book. Probyn and Lee, juftices, were of opinion, that the register-book being the public book, was to be confidered as the original entry from which evidence was to be given, and that it could not be controuled or altered by any thing appearing in the day-book. Page, J. was of contrary opinion. The following cafe was decided upon the fame principles: Rex v. Head, Worcester Spr. Assiz. 1762, cor. Noel, J. MS. In an information for bribery, the profecutor, to prove the party a freeman of Evesham, produced upon a 2s. stamp, a copy of a loose paper upon a file, which the witnefs faid was also on a 2s. stamp, to this effect: "Borough of Evesham, A. B. admitted to his freedom fuch a day." It appeared that there was a book, in which the acts of the corporation were kept, and where there was an entry more at large of the freeman's admiffion, and which was made when the party was originally admitted; but this was not on ftamp in the book; and it was objected, that this being the original book of the corporation, a copy of this should have been produced; but it appearing that fuch entry in the book was never upon ftamps, but the fhort entries were filed upon ftamps, and Parib Registers. are not, in any cafe, received as evidence of Ch. II. f.z. a marriage; not because a marriage celebrated there was not good, for fuch it clearly was before the marriage act; but becaufe the manner in which thofe marriages were celebrated, and the conduct of the perfons who, without any legal authority, affumed the power of regiftering them, have thrown fuch an odium on thofe books, as to take from them even the authority of a private memorandum (u). Rolls of Baron. 247. Doe dem. Mafon v. The Rolls of Courts Baron, are alfo received to prove the admiffions, &c. of tenants, and either an examined copy, or one figned Bul. N. P. by the fteward, may be read; fo alfo rolls which contain entries of defcents, &c. are evidence between the tenants to prove the customary courfe of defcent within the manor; and even an entry on an ancient roll of a finding by the homage what the cuftoms 5 T. Rep. were, though not accompanied by any parti-, cular inftance, or fupported by other evidence, is itfelf admiffible evidence to prove the cuf and kept amongst the corporation papers, Noel, J. faid, that this entry being the only effectual act, as having that which the law requires, viz. the proper stamp, must be looked upon as the proper and original act of the corporation, and therefore a copy of it was good evidence. (a) So ruled by Lord Kenyon in Reed v. Paffer, Peake's Caf. 231, Efp. 213, S. C. and by Lord C. J. De Grey in Howard v. Burtonwood, C. B. Sittings at Westminster after Trin. T. 1776; and previously by Lord Hardwicke and Lord C. J. Lee; but in Doe dem Paffingham v. Lloyd, Shrewsb. Summer Affiz. 1794, Mr. J. Heath admitted them in evidence. See Cooke v. Lloyd, Appendix. Beebee v. 26. Den dem. Goodwin v. Spray, Ch. II. f. 2. tom; for this not being the claim of a private Terriers. individual, but as it were the ler loci, tradition and received opinion, is evidence of it. On the fame principle a cuftomary of the manor of great antiquity, though not properly a Court Roll, nor figned by any perfon, but delivered down with the rolls from fteward to fteward, has been deemed good evidence. IT. Rep. 466. Similar to Court Rolls and Customaries, are ancient terriers or furveys of a parish or manor, which are either ecclefiaftical or temporal. The ecclefiaftical terriers are furveys made by virtue of the 87th canon, and are thereby ordered to be kept in the bishop's reRepertori- giftry; and Godolphin adds, that it may be um Cano- convenient to have a copy exemplified, and pend. 12 kept in the church cheft, wherefore, it was in Hutton,zd one cafe holden, that a paper purporting to Antir.386 be a terrier, found in the charter cheft of nicumAp Atkins v. Miller v. Trin. College, Cambridge (who were landholders in a parifh) was no evidence to difprove a modus: but as against one of the Prebendaries of Litchfield, a terrier found in the re387, note. giftry of the Dean and Chapter of Litchfield, was held fufficient evidence. K. B. ib. Theory of Evidence, 45 Bul. N. P. 248. Vide Earl v. Lewis, 4 Esp. Caf. I. It is alfo faid, that against the parfon, it is, in all cafes, ftrong evidence, but for him it is never admitted, unless figned by the churchwardens; and, if they are of his nomination, by fome of the fubftantial inhabitants of the parish alfo, Ancient |