This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1840 edition. Excerpt: ... the ultimate opinion of the learned counsel who directed the proofs, although his first impression was the other way; an impression which probably was the inducing motive to the defendant's attorney to procure this copy. Mr. Clancy's reasoning upon this subject has been assailed in strong terms as being illegal and illogical; I confess I cannot view it in that light; his reasoning appears to me to be quite sound, and his conclusion to follow justly from his premises. The defendant had, it appears, the printed copy of the evidence given by the plaintiff in his possession; from this printed copy he thought it not safe to make the statement in his pleas, but procured also the clerk's compared copy. Now neither of tiiese copies was legal evidence of the plaintiff's testimony; that, it is confessed, was to be found in the original manuscript notes revised and subscribed by the plaintiff himself; both copies (the printed and the manuscript) may have been inaccurate, though the probability is, that both were correct, both being taken from the same original, the one in manuscript, the other in print; and both being only of equal authority in law, that is, neither of them being admissible as evidence against the plaintiff. Mr. Clancy's offence is, that he thought, however prudent it might be for the defendants' counsel to see both when preparing the pleas, the party who had in his possession the printed copy should not be allowed, as against his adversary, the costs of the clerk's compared copy, even if the practice of the Court had allowed him to tax such expenses at all as between party and patty. I shall not particularize the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth changes; they are claims against the practice of the Court, and on that ground were...