This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1860. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... But it must appear that such declaration or entry was against the interest of the party making it, in order to be admissible; and if it do not so appear it will be rejected. Thus, in Reg. v. Inhabitants of Worth, h an entry by a deceased master in a book in which he was in the habit of entering the hirings of his servants, which was as follows: "April 4th, 1824. W. Worrell came, and to have for the half-year, 40s. Sept. 29. Paid this 2. Oct. 39 Came*again DEGREES and to have Is. per week to March 25th, 1825, is twenty-one weeks, two days, 1 Is. 6d. 25th. Paid this;" was tendered in evidence to prove the hiring in a settlement case, but was held inadmissible, on the ground that as it merely showed a contract which must be supposed to be made on equitable terms, the entry was not against the interest of the master. The declarations of deceased tenants have in many instances been admitted in evidence, on matters connected with their tenancies, principally, as it seems, upon the ground that their declarations were made against their own interest. through A. B., upon whose death he became entitled to a particular portion of his personal property as a heriot. And see Coide v. Braham, 3 Ex. 183.--A. had taken the goods of B. in execution, and the sheriff having executed a bill of sale to him, B. was permitted to remain in possession, and the sheriff afterwards took the same goods in execution at the suit of another creditor of B. In an action by A. against the sheriff for the goods, it was held, that the declarations of B. as to the property of the goods, and that A.'s execution was merely colourable, were admissible for the sheriff; Willies v. Farley, 3 C. & P. 395; E. C. L. R. 14; and see Prosser v. Gwillim, 1 C. & K. 95; E. C. L. R. 47; Gully v. Bishop of Exete...